Was Jesus a Buddhist Monk? (page 4)

skeeter1

Perhaps Jesus was in Japan. After all, Japanese people are known fishermen, and Jesus liked to fish!

Skeeter

possible-san

skeeter1.

Perhaps Jesus was in Japan. After all, Japanese people are known fishermen, and Jesus liked to fish!

Yeah, maybe. LOL

I think that you have a flexible thinking.

Well, in my website, I have explained that the ancient Japan's name "Yamato" means "Yahweh's people" in Hebrew.
And I have pointed out that if you write the word "Japan" in Hebrew/Japanese, the Divine Name (YHW) appears there.
http://godpresencewithin.web.fc2.com/pages/zatsugaku/firstchristian.html
http://godpresencewithin.web.fc2.com/pages/zatsugaku/yatanokagami.html

And, I have pointed out that the Japanese characters/letters and the Hebrew alphabets are alike.
http://godpresencewithin.web.fc2.com/pages/zatsugaku/kana.html

possible

The bottom line is that Buddha never quoted from the Torah, Buddha never preached the Shema creed to the scribes and Pharisees, Buddha never spoke to Elijah and Moses in a transfiguration, Buddha never stood up to any money changers at a Jewish temple, Buddha never rebuked the Pharisees and told them to obey YHWH instead of their own Talmudic traditions (Mark Chapter 7).

This entire premise suggests a lot of parallels but I think the key to understanding the differences is what matters more. We're talking about a figure that is represented as the seed of David, the high priest of Melchizedek, "Son of God", "son of man" and we can definitely say that Buddha didn't die on a cross, he wasn't entombed for three days and he wasn't resurrected.

As far as the immaculate conception goes, Buddha's mother was not a virgin. Many of these other alleged similarities are simply coincidental at best, and many of them are both forced and farced to the degree of waffle.

MoneurMallard

Sizemik, good point. However, I think the validity of historicity trumps everything else, since we're dealing with literature as the primary source of our investigation. If the actual historical information about a subject is lacking, such as any good contemporary historical document to establish the identity of this Yeshua of Nazareth, or Nazarene as the writer of Matthew asserts, than we can probably surmise all sorts of coincidences in the 100's of gospel accounts of his life with that of other savior figures.

Personally I think one must separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to reading any piece of literature, specifically the gospels, epistles and apocryphal texts of the second and third centuries. I gain all sorts of lessons from certain parts and pieces of the bible, and I wouldn't abandon them from my bookshelf simply because there is a lot of wisdom in the minds of so many ancients that comprised them. For the same reason I wouldn't abandon the Quran, Avesta or any other ancient text, simply because to me it holds value as a way to look into the minds of those who lived long ago.

sizemik

Many of these other alleged similarities are simply coincidental at best, and many of them are both forced and farced to the degree of waffle.

That may well be so if one is speaking in terms of absolutes rather than possibilities . . .

But if one side of the ledger is subject to the accusation of being "waffle" . . . then it doesn't increase the value of the other side when one adds this . . .

Buddha never quoted from the Torah, Buddha never preached the Shema creed to the scribes and Pharisees, Buddha never spoke to Elijah and Moses in a transfiguration, Buddha never stood up to any money changers at a Jewish temple, Buddha never rebuked the Pharisees and told them to obey YHWH instead of their own Talmudic traditions

I don't think it has ever been suggested that Jesus was Buddha or vice-versa . . .

For a "bottom line" . . . you gotta admit . . . that's grasping at "straws" at best . . . but really just waffle.

Awen

I found this site several weeks ago while trying to find evidence for the historical Jesus. Yes, I'm a believer but I still like to reinforce things from time to time with evidence. It seems well written. I'm not a scholar by any means, just a simple lay person and so there may be many things on this site that are incorrect.

So perhaps Moneur Mallard would be so kind as to give his/her take on this site.

Peace

Morgan

MoneurMallard

Morgan,

Take a look at the dates of the lives of those historians on that article. Jesus died in the year 40AD or so at the latest, not one of those historians were alive yet. Josephus is disqualified by almost all non-bias comparative religious scholars, as it is well known that most of his work is spurious.

There are numerous historians of contemporary value that never mention Jesus of Nazareth during the time which these events would have allegedly occurred. It should startle any Christian believer, really. Morgan did you read the article I posted on the other thread?

http://nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

We have numerous credible historians who mention even the most trivial of things in the early first century, but no mention of a Jesus from Nazareth. No mention of numerous dead bodies coming to life out of caves and appearing to people in Jerusalem, as the 3 lines in Matthew 27 would have us believe. Which brings up another point, why is it that only the gospel of Matthew mentions this dramatic event? Surely the thousands of alleged witnesses and Romans would have reported back to Rome these glorious events. But they didn't. Because, they never happened.

MoneurMallard

Sizemik,

I wasn't suggesting that one was the other or vice versa, just showing that there are just as many differences as there may be similarities. Although for all intensive purposes, when it comes to religious stories, we are after all dealing with hearsay evidence of the past lives of ancient scribes and authors.

Unless a deity actuall reveals itself first hand to any of us, we're not taking the deity's word for it, we're taking the word of the established religion or institution telling us it is so.

MoneurMallard

Concerning Jesus not jiving with Jehovah, I'm not really seeing that according to the tales... Jesus said many things that eclipse (no pun intended) the dark side of the YHWH character quite well...

Mat 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. Mat 5:18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Mat 5:19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Mat 5:20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Mat 5:21 "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.' Mat 5:22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire.

If anything the aforementioned statements takes the law of YHWH to an even higher and more difficult state.

Mat 10:34 "Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. Mat 10:35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. Mat 10:36 And a person's enemies will be those of his own household.

Luk 19:27 But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.'"

Mat 13:41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, Mat 13:42 and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Mat 18:8 And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into the eternal fire. Mat 18:9 And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into the hell of fire. Joh_15:6 If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. Mat 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Mat 7:22 On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' Mat 7:23 And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.' And last but not least, my favorite, simply because it's quite hypocritical, in John 8 this same character allegedly forgave an adulterating woman and let her walk free without being stoned, while here in Revelation, a different approach? Rev 2:21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. Rev 2:22 Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. Rev 2:23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works. Did the woman in John 8 repent? Instead the Jesus of John 8 seemed avid on attacking those who were going to punish her... Strange book indeed...

Mad Sweeney

I'd like to see the original question explored further. I don't care if we're talking about a historical figure or a created conglomeration of myths. Did the Jesus we know show similarities to the teachings of Buddhism or Taoism or Hinduism? The answer is yes. So the follow-up questions are: Exactly how great are the parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the eastern philosophies? And what is the liklihood that a first century Jew in Palestine would become aware of those eastern concepts without traveling to the east?

Wanna discuss whether there is really a historical Jesus at all? Feel free to start a new topic, but it seems to me that historical characters are rarely created out of whole cloth. The Biblical Jesus may not represent the actual person very accurately but it seems logical that the original movement had to be based on SOMEone who really lived - even if he didn't do or say half the things the book says he did.

Was Jesus a Buddhist Monk?

Share this